Preview

Kant Vs Mill

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1231 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Kant Vs Mill
Mill's is a utilitarian who believes in the theory of Utilitarianism which is more of an ethical theory compared to Kant's and his breakdown of the fundamental metaphysics and the use in proving what is” right and what is wrong”. Kant employs his views and thought of metaphysics as a discipline in his ethical philosophy. "if a law is to have moral force. Two of the greatest well known philosophers have thoughts on it and they are Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. Immanuel kant and John Stuart Mill consider the death penalty is fairly right ,but they gives totally two different opposite thoughts and reasons on why it should be. Immanuel kant has very …show more content…
In other words this quote mean, that the true duty of punishment isn't meant to improve society In other words, the function of punishment is not to improve society, but to rectify a person's wrongdoing .The act of punishment can only take place after a person been punishable.In order for them to be found punishable consist of them committing a crime,if there isn't no crime ,then it shouldn't be no punishment even if the use of punishment would benefit or the criminals.This is because his right as a person "protects him against such treatment." (32).Kant convey two types of punishment,judicial and natural.Natural punishment can be considered as a result of the cause and effect law and can also be when things are done incorrectly and the act of nature for instance “you placing your hand on a stove knowing it's …show more content…
This view forms the basis of the contrasting argument between him and Kant .Mill principle of `utility also known as the greatest happiness is that, when people act out of duty it justifies the utilitarian principle as a foundation of morals.It explains that actions are right in proportions and promote overall human happiness of everything or anything that can ;possibly tolerate pain.it focus on the consequence of actions.Not on rights or ethical sentiments.it is best to be cultivated and noble
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Mill's Utilitarianism Chapter Summary
    • 387 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Mill's Utilitarianism Chapter Summary

    The most important part of the Mill’s utilitarianism chapter is the Greatest Happiness Principle. The Greatest Happiness Principle means the rule of human conduct. This…

    • 387 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Analysis Of The Theory Of Utilitarianism By John Stuart Mill
    • 430 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Analysis Of The Theory Of Utilitarianism By John Stuart Mill

    “The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness” (11). That quote is from “Utilitarianism” written by John Stuart Mill. Mill is noted in history as a man who pushed for radical change of social and legal principles using Utilitarianism as his guide. That quote sums up his belief in that theory. In this essay I will be discussing Mill, the theory of Utilitarianism and how that theory relates to contemporary ethical issues.…

    • 430 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Ethics Case Study: The Plight Of Dr. Ethos
    • 1741 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Ethics Case Study: The Plight Of Dr. Ethos

    “ The ‘greatest happiness principle’ holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mill p. 7). Actions only hold moral worth if the consequences are favorable on a grand scale. In utilitarianism actions are evaluated, not people which brings about the “agent neutral” concept. Mill stated ‘the utilitarian standard of what is right in conduct is not the agent’s own happiness but that of all concerned…as between his own happiness and that of others, utilitarianism requires him to be as strictly impartial as a disinterested benevolent spectator.’…

    • 1741 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Why Is Net Neutrality Morally Impermissible?
    • 1730 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Why Is Net Neutrality Morally Impermissible?

    This theory is a consequentialist based ethical theory which states you must choose the action that increases the total utility. John Stuart Mill was a key proponent of Utilitarianism. Utility is defined as the total happiness or pleasure, minus the total unhappiness or pain involved in the action. Another name for utility is the Greatest Happiness principle. From the definition of utility, pleasure and the absence of pain are the only things desirable as ends in themselves and are the only things that are good.…

    • 1730 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Ethical Systems of Kant and Mill
    • 2194 Words
    • 9 Pages

    The Ethical Systems of Kant and Mill

    What part does happiness play in determining the morality of an act in a situation? Can a concept that ties morality to the search of happiness truly be rational? What of the opposite? Is it possible to view every situation with objectivity, never taking into account an emotion (like happiness)? The questions above concern themselves with the part of the central tenets of the ethical views of two very important philosophers, respectfully: John Mill and Immanuel Kant. The ethical theories that these two philosophers laid out clash with each other in fundamental ways, from how reason was defined, to the role that “happiness” played in determining the ethical choice in a moral dilemma. In the following pages, I will attempt to present and discuss the theories of Kant and Mill, pointing out what I perceive as weakness in said theories, as well as the possible strengths of each system.…

    • 2194 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Mill: Utilitarianism, Chapters 1-3
    • 571 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Mill: Utilitarianism, Chapters 1-3

    In chapter number one titled “General Remarks” Mill starts off by talking about what is to be seen as morally right and morally wrong things, yet no one has a complete understanding for what is actually morally right and wrong. He then talks about “Moral Faculty” and two different views or opinions on the subject. Mill states in his text that “Our moral faculty, according to all those of its interpreters who are entitled to the name of thinkers, supplies us only with the general principles of moral judgments; it is a branch of our reason, not of our sensitive faculty; and must be looked to for the abstract doctrines of morality, not for perception of it in the concrete. The intuitive, no less than what may be termed the inductive, school of ethics, insists on the necessity of general laws.” The quote that Mill states is very outstanding for the reason of “applying the concept of law to ones certain case,” this is what Mill is trying to relate between the two different views. Mill also states that the differences between the two is where the “source from which they derive their authority” but yet they both agree on the concept of “moral law.” So as the chapter is coming to an end Mill comments on how “Utilitarianism has had a tremendous influence in shaping moral doctrines, even among the people who reject the principle.” Since our class had just been reading text from Kant his “idea of law” or “will” is still fresh in my mind and can easily be seen as a difference to what Mill is stating in the “Utilitarianism.” I can directly relate the two ideas because Kant’s “will” for a rational being may be thought of “the objective laws of reason and morality” or “subjective needs and interests,” which is what Mill is talking about in his two different views of “Moral Faculty.” Kant also states that “Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” but Mill argues the point…

    • 571 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism
    • 932 Words
    • 4 Pages

    John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism

    In Mill’s Utilitarianism, he examines what determines an action to be considered right or wrong, his own version of the hedonistic utilitarianism argument. He claims that these qualities, including the quantity, are an important factor in determining, when included in the consequences, the criteria of an action. The consequences of ones actions are an important element in society, one that is based on cause and effect. When an action is committed, it is important for an individual to consider what the consequences will be, regardless of the motives, because when the action has gone through, the consequences will be held in th spotlight by society, regardless of the motives of the…

    • 932 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    John Stuart Mill Just And Unjust
    • 1386 Words
    • 6 Pages

    John Stuart Mill Just And Unjust

    With this general happiness for everyone’s well-being, a persons priority or rights can’t take a lead or be more important over the general happiness of everybody (chapter II, p.17). This agrees with Aristotle’s, that the political functioning in a society through virtuous character are to benefit the community. Mill argues against Aristotle by claiming that because having security is the definitive right that is deserved by all people through law, certain actions, such as torture, are just in order to ensure that a person has security (Chapter 5, p.54). With this being said Utilitarianism follows a concept that is focused on the general happiness of everyone in the community, but also the happiness that comes to them through security. Mill states that there are certain qualities that show justice and injustice, and some of these qualities are that it is unjust for a person to be deprived of their legal and moral rights, but it is just that everybody should get what they deserve. According to this, torture of a person, can be justified because it will overall give people assurance of security and happiness. But, it is also unjust because it violates a person’s moral and legal rights. This is where the General Happiness Principle comes into play. The Greatest Happiness Principle holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness and wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness, which is pain (Chapter 2, p. 7). Happiness is the absence of pain or freedom of pain, which is the only thing that should be desirable as an end and people will always choose the end that is overall more desirable in pleasure (Chapter 2, p. 8). Mill clearly states, “…laws and social arrangements should place the happiness or the interest of…

    • 1386 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    How Is Survival Lottery Ethical
    • 648 Words
    • 3 Pages

    How Is Survival Lottery Ethical

    The first priority of any circumstance and the greatest value is human rights. No one should be treated as just a means, each person should be given a sense of humanity. As he announces in this, “So act as to treat humanity, whether in thine own person or in that of any other, in every case as and withal, never as means only.” (Vaughn, p.105). Kant’s view of punishment is that any crime no matter what it is, they should not be punished for justice. As he says in this, “Kant thinks that criminals should be punished only because they perpetrated crimes; the public good is irrelevant. In addition, Kant thinks that the central principle of punishment should fit the crime.” (Vaughn,…

    • 648 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    John Stuart Mill Utilitarianism
    • 1258 Words
    • 6 Pages

    John Stuart Mill Utilitarianism

    John Stuart Mill was considered a Utilitarian. The philosophy of Utilitarianism is that an action should be decided by what is best for society. Mill’s philosophy was in part developed by his upbringing as a child. His childhood was restricted and he was raised in an enviroment where is emotionally needs were not met. Also his father was a friend of Jeremy Bentham. Bentham was a philosopher credited with starting the beginings of the Utiltarianism philosophy. He focused on the relationships between the social classes and working towards social reform. His philosophy focused more on social conditions and human behavior than previous philosophies had. He looked at practical solutions for societies problems and less on the metaphysical aspects…

    • 1258 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes Vs Mill
    • 1168 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Hobbes Vs Mill

    How does Mill think justice is distinguished from the rest of morality? What is Mill’s response to those who think our intuitions about justice show that the principle of utility is not the basic moral principle? [300 words]…

    • 1168 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    kant
    • 634 Words
    • 3 Pages

    kant

    Kant was a deontologist who believed that knowledge was created by the mind, not external factors; because of this he wanted to unite reason and experience. Humanity’s frail nature was the human condition according to Kant, their struggle to make moral decisions and do the right thing can only be solved by employing reason and his three maxims when decision making.…

    • 634 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Compare And Contrast Mill Vs Aquinas
    • 1207 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Compare And Contrast Mill Vs Aquinas

    This results in Mill’s claim that a Government’s sole responsibility is to represent the interests of its people: “Those interests, I contend, authorize the subjection of individual spontaneity to external control only in respect to those actions of each which concern the interest of other people” (On Liberty 139). He claims that there are certain situations where it is better to have legal remedies than condemning people morally. In these instances he believes Government to be beneficial to society as it promotes the higher good of freedom. Furthermore, he asserts that laws should be made to protect people from engaging in actions that have been tried since the beginning of time and have proven to be harmful (On Liberty 141).…

    • 1207 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Immanuel Kant Research Paper
    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Immanuel Kant Research Paper

    We are thought of as rational beings; therefore we make our decisions based on reason. Reason is the root of all rationality, and what surrounds us is what influences our reason for what we do. We want to succeed in everything we do, including business, relationships, and life in general. The way we go about succeeding is making decisions based on the improvement of our well-being. In Kant’s second section he states that, “If reason infallibly determines the will, the actions which such a being recognizes as objectively necessary are also subjectively necessary.” Kant is telling us that our reason determines what we want to be, and as humans we want happiness. We recognize our actions as subjectively and objectively necessary, meaning that what we do is proven to be right, and also morally right. As a majority we base our actions on morals, and our self-law giving supports these morals (for the most part). That is why morality is so important, because if we are the ones to decide what is right and wrong, then technically our well-being is up to us. An example is the Nike sweat shops, there wasn’t a law monitoring their working conditions or pay. But Nike’s autonomic power was used for immoral actions in third world countries. Nike’s immoral actions caused the suffering and unhappiness for many people which is not the realm of ends our world aims…

    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Lifeboat Case And Utilitarianism
    • 583 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Lifeboat Case And Utilitarianism

    Utilitarianism is a theory of justice whose highest principle is to maximize happiness and utility: “The basic idea of utilitarianism is simple: the right thing to do is what produces the most good” (Mill, 15). The “most good” can be understood in terms of happiness, or the greater amount of pleasure than of pain. Therefore, utilitarians measure the consequences of actions by how much the results bring happiness to the greatest amount of people. The best alternative to any situation is the one that produces the greatest net utility. According to John Stuart Mill, “”Utility” or the “greatest happiness principle” holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (16). Therefore, whatever produces the most good is considered to be just.…

    • 583 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More

Related Topics